tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9170261917486213112.post1469575519499575224..comments2024-01-22T09:45:29.790+01:00Comments on Racing Rules of Sailing - Look to Windward: (pillow)Case of the week (29/12) - 03Joshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10346870418220762709noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9170261917486213112.post-60465042692875628482012-07-22T09:16:46.372+02:002012-07-22T09:16:46.372+02:00Now I can paste the link to the discussion (couldn...Now I can paste the link to the discussion (couldn't paste on the mobile version of blogger):<br /><a href="http://www.unrulyracing.com/2010/11/isaf-case-3-and-versus-us-sailing.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.unrulyracing.com/2010/11/isaf-case-3-and-versus-us-sailing.html</a><br />It was sent to me by another judge... we were discussing whether PL can be exonerated under 64.1(c) if, unlike PL in case 3, PL "forces PW to tack" by tacking to avoid S and breaking 13 against PW. This is related to our "compelled" discussion... US appeals 2 says no exoneration, case 3 says yes exoneration (but it cites "she had no right to force PW onto the opposite tack", maybe suggesting that if she attempted she might not be exonerated for the breach).<br /><br />What is you take on this Jos? I can then tell you what our decision in that case was :)latindanenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9170261917486213112.post-51132153695841103082012-07-16T16:56:21.464+02:002012-07-16T16:56:21.464+02:00What if PL tacks to avoid S, and breaks 13? There ...What if PL tacks to avoid S, and breaks 13? There is an interesting discussion about case 3 vs. US appeals 2...latindanenoreply@blogger.com